- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Jason Williams federal tax evasion trial starts today
Posted on 7/18/22 at 11:16 am to Saskwatch
Posted on 7/18/22 at 11:16 am to Saskwatch
quote:
I mean you think the Judge will just sit back and allow that?
Lawyer makes a comment or insinuates something during a line of questioning. Judge sustains an objection from the prosecutors and/or strikes the statement. It's still heard by the jurors. It would not surprise me for this to be a hung jury given the demographics of New Orleans.
Posted on 7/20/22 at 12:54 pm to SippyCup
Al Copeland’s attorney got his law license back, and without much delay after getting out the joint.
Posted on 7/20/22 at 12:56 pm to SCLibertarian
quote:
It would not surprise me for this to be a hung jury given the demographics of New Orleans.
Edla is very different than cdc
Posted on 7/20/22 at 1:01 pm to JohnnyKilroy
This isn’t a New Orleans jury. There were people from about 5 different parishes in the jury pool.
Posted on 7/20/22 at 1:05 pm to SCLibertarian
quote:
Judge sustains an objection from the prosecutors and/or strikes the statement. It's still heard by the jurors
Question for attorneys on here.
I always see this on TV. How prevalent is it that a judge asks the jurors to disregard that last statement? It's already heard and the damage is done. Do attorneys deliberately do this knowing it will be disregarded just to get it out there?
When the jurors are trying to decide guilty or not guilty, is this when it cones into play as they cant use that as a reason?
This has always bugged me
Posted on 7/20/22 at 1:10 pm to Jones
I'm not an attorney, but I believe if the statement is egregious enough it can be cause for a mistrial.
Posted on 7/21/22 at 11:55 am to Epic Cajun
Okay which one of you posted death threats about him?
Authorities investigating Death Threats against Jason Williams during trial
Authorities investigating Death Threats against Jason Williams during trial
quote:
Louisiana State Police confirmed to WWL-TV that an online threat was made against Williams. A spokesperson for LSP said the agency's fusion unit discovered an online post and alerted the New Orleans Police Department and district attorney's office of the threat.
Posted on 7/21/22 at 12:00 pm to SCLibertarian
quote:
Lawyer makes a comment or insinuates something during a line of questioning. Judge sustains an objection from the prosecutors and/or strikes the statement. It's still heard by the jurors. It would not surprise me for this to be a hung jury given the demographics of New Orleans.
if it's something that was discussed and ruled on pre-trial... and the lawyer still goes there... the judge could give the lawyer a very stern lecturing
I remember the judge in the Rittenhouse case full on yelling at the prosecutor for basically questioning Rittenhouse invoking his 5th Amendment rights during questioning and trying to use that as part of the evidence against him
if a judge thinks a lawyer is getting out of line... a good judge will immediately halt everything and admonish the lawyer in question
Posted on 7/21/22 at 12:19 pm to Fun Bunch
It’s racist to investigate him. The ‘system’ is racist.
The prosecutors are racist. If the jurors convict him they are all racist regardless of color.
I can say this without knowing one fricking thing about the case.
I don’t need to know ANYTHING about the case. The fact that charges are being brought against him is proof of racism.
The prosecutors are racist. If the jurors convict him they are all racist regardless of color.
I can say this without knowing one fricking thing about the case.
I don’t need to know ANYTHING about the case. The fact that charges are being brought against him is proof of racism.
Posted on 7/21/22 at 12:21 pm to geauxtigers87
quote:Once you figure in all the Republicans, yes. The democrats are convicted at a lower rate.
if he's getting tried by the feds he's fricked. dont they have like a 90% + conviction rate?
Posted on 7/21/22 at 12:27 pm to Fun Bunch
Soros backed prog scum. I hope he goes down.
Posted on 7/21/22 at 12:28 pm to Geekboy
I don't know what all the prosecution has left to present, but their first few days including their star witness looks pretty bad for them. This case isn't what it sounded like before it went to trial.
Posted on 7/21/22 at 12:54 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:
Do tell.
I don't have any knowledge outside of news reports and what reporters are tweeting from court. But the short version is, Williams gave all his information to the accountant, who prepared the returns for him, and even the accountant doesn't say Williams told him to lie. How do you put Williams in prison for that, unless you claim he "knew" what the guy was doing was wrong. Seems pretty hard to prove. That would be a pretty good defense for anyone charged with a tax crime. Isn't that what every businessman in America does- hand their information to their accountant who prepares the return?
Their star witness is the tax preparer, who has had to admit to a huge number of lies. He claimed, falsely, to be a CPA. He even lied to the grand jury in this case, claiming to have an accounting degree which he doesn't. He claimed to be a CPA as part of some unrelated fraud scheme he isn't being prosecuted for. He admitted to continuing to file fraudulent returns for himself, even after the IRS started investigating him, and after Williams was no longer his client. At one point he was asked what he was thinking when he filed false tax returns and he said "I wasn't thinking." He was allowed to plead guilty to only one crime, despite having 1,500 other clients who he probably did the same thing for. But even he can't say that Williams ever told him to lie, or take a false deduction, or failed to give him all the information needed to report his income.
One thing in the openings that sounded bad for Williams was when the government talked about them having lots of cash income in his office. You can get busted for that if you don't report it. But, the prosecutors also didn't talk like they really had the goods on Williams for not reporting it all, such as having bank deposit slips or something. So, we will see. It just sounded like if they get him on anything it may be the cash.
We will see.
Posted on 7/21/22 at 1:42 pm to ExtraGravy
I heard about the accountant lying about being a CPA, and I agree that hurts a little.
From what I understand, everyone is going to testify that JW knew about the scheme though. It also hurts a lot when someone is an attorney and as "sophisticated" as JW. That can be used against you. Often times "should have known" is treated the same as if you did know.
From what I understand, everyone is going to testify that JW knew about the scheme though. It also hurts a lot when someone is an attorney and as "sophisticated" as JW. That can be used against you. Often times "should have known" is treated the same as if you did know.
Posted on 7/21/22 at 1:45 pm to ExtraGravy
Hmm. From what I was reading, limited to live tweets on WDSU, (so not reliable necessarily), Timothy said Williams was not happy with the original tax returns and wanted them amended, Williams/Burdette provided the P&Ls used to amend the returns and Burdette asked him to increase the expenses, among other things. He testified as to being pressured by them and that Burdett would sometimes not accept returns and send back.
Seems like could be some issue between Williams and Burdette, as she appears to be more directly involved in interactions with Timothy.
Seems like could be some issue between Williams and Burdette, as she appears to be more directly involved in interactions with Timothy.
Posted on 7/21/22 at 1:50 pm to Havoc
it sounds like there is a bit of a better case against Burdette than Williams since Burdette was the one dealing with the accountant all the time.
Posted on 7/21/22 at 1:51 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:
I heard about the accountant lying about being a CPA, and I agree that hurts a little
quote:
Often times "should have known" is treated the same as if you did know.
I don't understand how a high earning attorney finds this guy in Westwego and utilizes him for personal and business tax? It reeks of JW knowing that if this is exposed they can use all of this guy's poor representations and vices to make a case he is a fraud later.
Do my bidding because I can make you out to be a bigger scumbag than me at a later date
This post was edited on 7/21/22 at 1:53 pm
Posted on 7/21/22 at 1:57 pm to Fun Bunch
The tax preparer seems to have done a poor job on the stand, but the prosecutors had to have known that going in. I would think there will be other witnesses to hammer home the fact that JW knew that this tax guy was fraudulent and that he went to him to save significantly on taxes, not for actual legit tax advice. Two lawyers from his office are taking the stand along with JWs ex wife, and all have pled guilty to tax charges. I’d imagine they are going to say that they all went to this tax guy who will just enter whatever you give him, no questions asked. They’ll probably prove intent. The female law partner seems to have known the tax prep guy and was at the center of all of it.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News